FIA confirms replacement of Masi and changes to race control after Abu Dhabi row

2022 F1 season

Posted on

| Written by

The FIA has confirmed Formula 1 race director Michael Masi will not continue in the role following its investigation into the handling of the Abu Dhabi Grand Prix.

The F1 race director role will be shared by World Endurance Championship race director Eduardo Freitas and DTM race director Niels Wittich as of next week’s pre-season test.

In a video issued by the sport’s governing body, FIA president Mohammed Ben Sulayem also announced a raft of changes to race control, including revisions to the unlapping procedure which was at the heart of the controversial end to the 2021 world championship.

The FIA will also introduce a new virtual race control room which Ben Sulayem likened to the video assistance referee (VAR) used in football.

Ben Sulayem’s announcement followed a meeting of the F1 Commission in London earlier this week at which the outcomes of its inquiry into the Abu Dhabi debacle were discussed.

“During the F1 Commission meeting in London, I presented part of my plan for a new step forward in Formula 1 refereeing,” said Ben Sulayem. “Drawing conclusions from the detailed analysis of the events of the last F1 Abu Dhabi Grand Prix and from the 2021 season, I proposed an in-depth reform of the organisation of refereeing and race direction.”

Ben Sulayem said his plan “was unanimously supported by the F1 CEO and team’s principles.”

“Firstly, to assess the race director and the decision making process, a virtual race control room will be created,” he explained. “Like the video assistant referee, VAR and football. It will be positioned in one of the FIA offices as a back-up outside the circuit. In real-time connection with the FIA F1 race director it will help to apply the sporting regulations using the most modern technological tools.

Advert | Become a RaceFans supporter and go ad-free

“Secondly, direct radio communications during the race, currently broadcast live by all TVs, will be removed in order to protect the race director from any pressure and allow him to take decisions peacefully. It will be still possible to ask questions to the race director, according to a well-defined and non-intrusive process.

“Thirdly, unlapping procedures behind safety car will be reassessed by the F1 Sporting Advisory Committee and presented to the next F1 Commission prior to the start of the season.

“And finally, I would like to inform you that a new race management team will be put in place starting in Barcelona for the test session. Niels Wittich and Eduardo Freitas will act alternatively as the race director, assisted by Herbie Blash as permanent senior adviser. Michael Masi, who accomplished a very challenging job for three years as Formula 1 race director following Charlie Whiting, will be offered a new position within the FIA.”

Ben Sulayem, who replaced former president Jean Todt last December, said the plan “opens the way for a new step forward in Formula 1 refereeing.”

“Without the referees, there is no sport. Respect and support of the referees is in the essence of the FIA. That is why these structural changes are crucial in a context of strong development and the legitimate expectations of drivers, teams, manufacturers, organisers, and of course, the fans.

“I warmly thank all those who contributed to this reform. These changes will enable us to start the 2022 Formula 1 season in the best conditions, and our sport will be even more loved and respected.”

Advert | Become a RaceFans supporter and go ad-free

2022 F1 season

Browse all 2022 F1 season articles

Author information

Keith Collantine
Lifelong motor sport fan Keith set up RaceFans in 2005 - when it was originally called F1 Fanatic. Having previously worked as a motoring...

Got a potential story, tip or enquiry? Find out more about RaceFans and contact us here.

202 comments on “FIA confirms replacement of Masi and changes to race control after Abu Dhabi row”

  1. Niels Wittich, the race director in the ONLY series in the world that had a more farcical title decideder than F1, DTM, to be co-race director? What a joke.

    1. Bringing Herbie Blash out of retirement also stinks of sticking plaster on a leaking warhead. Temporary, poor fix.

    2. This is just a punitive exercise. Masi is being punished, regardless of whether suitable replacements were available, and not on merit. Whether that’s fair or not is in the middle.

      1. Can’t disagree with you there.

      2. i am wondering if even Masi himself wanted to continue as race director after last season. Must have been an immerse pressure on him just based on the radio messages broadcasted. There must have been more. Maybe he also got a few not so nice messages from fans, similar to Latifi..

        1. Constantijn Blondel
          17th February 2022, 14:14

          Good point …

        2. Indeed, if I was Masi I’d resign.

        3. Certainly could be and good for him if that’s the case.

      3. So 2 laps earlier, not 3. And if it were 2 laps left, according to the rules, unlapping would have been during lap 57 and then the SC would be called in at the end of the next lap. Right?

        1. Obviously misplaced comment… Sorry

      4. Michael (@freelittlebirds)
        17th February 2022, 15:15

        It’s pretty clear the FIA’s integrity is on the line here and Masi was just part of the problem. He had to go.

      5. @hahostolze months before that race, the teams are reported as having collectively informed the FIA that they were deeply unhappy with Masi’s governance and made an explicit request that Eduardo Freitas was given Masi’s job instead.

        Between complaints about inconsistent advice to the teams, contradictory information during drivers briefings and major concerns about the safety breaches at races such as Imola in 2020, where we had the near miss between the marshals and drivers, the teams are reported as having collectively informed the FIA more than once last year that they were rapidly losing trust in Masi and that he either needed to split his role or should be removed from his role altogether.

        Even without Abu Dhabi, it seems that the teams had already lost most of their confidence in Masi’s ability to safely and consistently manage races. As such, it sounds like it was more of a matter of when, not if, Masi was going to be replaced – Abu Dhabi seems to have just brought forward what seems to have been an inevitable change due to major questions being raised about his competence and suitability for that role in the first place.

        1. Nice to know.

          It would be nice to have those details in the open instead of misinforming only to generate the clicks.

        2. Can you provide a link to those “Reports”?

          I read far and wide and I haven’t seen anyone reporting that. There is heaps of he said she said about he might have said this and they might have said that, but I have never heard any suggestion anywhere that all the teams came together to say this.

          The teams couldn’t come together to agree on the colour that the sky is let alone anything to do with the race director. If Ferrari said one thing, Red bull would just automatically say something else on principal. That leads me to believe this is made up news.

    3. Well Mercedes now have a race-director in place who will favor them, just like DTM in 2021.

      I agree Masi should be replaced as he made too many mistakes over the whole 2021 starting racing 1 and finishing in style the last race.

    4. FlyingLobster27
      17th February 2022, 15:59

      Not only the DTM race director, but the WEC race director too. So we have guys from both series that I absolutely avoid like the plague because team orders are so common.
      To be fair though, that’s a team/manufacturer culture, not a race control culture. Race directors can’t do anything about it, unless there’s a rule that allows them to report it to the stewards. DTM has just decided they’ll have a rule to ban team orders (it’s taken them 23 years to make a stand, good job), but we know how enforceable that’ll be. Yeah, I’ll stay away for now.

      As I’ve said before, I don’t think F1 needed a new race director, but it needed a better one, someone with a firm grip on elementary procedures and capable of rebuking team principals. That could have been Masi if he’d promised to set his mind to it, but he’d have kind of been on probation had he stayed on, so I get it. Freitas sounds like a solid choice, he was quite a revelation for his clear style of communication in running of WEC races in its early years and has a good chance of stamping some authority on the field. Don’t know anything about Wittich.

    5. So you can feel the mercedes influence on this decision.
      They already threw Masi for the bus earlier..
      So Mercedes probably likes the way DTM races are run..

      1. How is this Mercedes influence or the FIA trying to restore some confidence in their adminstration.

        1. Mercedes got Masi sacked and received the best Mercedes Race director they could have wished for.

      2. Still here 😘

    6. I don’t think you can blame the DTM race director for their finale in the same way you could for F1. I think DTM was a case for the stewards to consider, I don’t think the rave director could, or should, have done anything differently.

    7. Too bad for Masi. It must be hard to deal with being fired for doing the job that you were hired to do perfectly.

  2. Pat Ruadh (@fullcoursecaution)
    17th February 2022, 13:27

    Ok boys the Ferrari has released the Ferrari has released!
    Send the press statement go go go!!!!

    1. It is very cheeky and the kind of move you usually see in politics.. :/

    2. Haha my thoughts as well, Ferrari bosses must be (rightfully) angry that the media attention is immediately stolen from them. And it’s not like the FIA didn’t have a free day yesterday with no car reveals to announce this.

    3. You are spot on.
      I posted the very first comment criticizing Masi on this platform, before his first race.
      My first critique was that f1 had lost the opportunity to revamp Charlie’s “office”. You can’t replace Charlie with a Mikey.
      I often compared fia’s comms with wec’s, where the race director addresses everyone at the same time.
      Now back to Masi.
      After a slew of massive mistakes much more important than Abu dhabi followed, Masi finally got the sack.
      Masi’s sausage kerb placement almost killed a couple drivers and his handling of a driver with a broken neck is probably his worst offence. Meanwhile spa f2 happened. Spa f1 also happened and the whole 2021 season happened.
      I think it is a shame that Masi got replaced as a result of the aftermath of his bravest decision, and perhaps the only time Masi corrected a call of his.
      The mistake of announcing prematurely that lapped cars would not be allowed to unlap and thus sealing mercs title was not going to look good, especially after many merc favouring calls throughout 2021. On the other hand he would have lived. Now, bravely bodging this bad premature call generated a far worse look. Sporting wise I rather have the finale we had than the original call. I don’t think having the whole field unlap instead of a few cars would have mattered for public opinion.
      Masi went against merc, he went against the establishment.
      The message to take here is that if you make a mistake, deny it, blame it on someone else or pretend it never happened.
      Farewell Masi and thanks for not totally ruinning 2021.

      1. “The mistake of announcing prematurely that lapped cars would not be allowed to unlap and thus sealing mercs title was not going to look good, especially after many merc favouring calls throughout 2021. On the other hand he would have lived. Now, bravely bodging this bad premature call generated a far worse look. Sporting wise I rather have the finale we had than the original call. I don’t think having the whole field unla” it doesnt matter if its look good or not, all it matters he follows the rules to the letter.

      2. Masi did not prematurely tell cars not to unlap, the car on the track was on fire and hence needed marshalls to attend it, you can’t release lapped cars to get out of the way while there is still clean up going on.

        The correct process as per the rules should have been the safety car to come in as soon as possible and with a decision made for lapped cars to be allowed to pass or not.

        If lapped cars were to be allowed to pass then that should have been done as soon as it was safe to do so and then the green flag should have been given on the next lap after that instruction. If you decided to not unlap the cars then you could green flag the race a lap sooner.

        What we got was not written anywhere in the rule book and had no precedent in what was arguable the most important moment for the championship battle of the year. Whenever you do not follow the rules in a sport there will always be an outrage. What we got was a shocking sporting injustice perpetuated for the show with little regard for the reputation of the sport. I’d have said the same had the result been the other way round too.

        1. 100%

        2. It wasn’t in the rule book but in the end it didn’t change much.

      3. At least he corrected somehow, but yeah that’s what happens when you go against the establishment.

  3. Yeah positive changes, I feel for Masi as he was handicapped by an old school, unfit for purpose race directing framework and operational processes. Add the pressure of having teams on the phone to him constantly, that was always going to be a challenge. I still think the decision to let the cars between Lewis and Max was the right one, they should tweak the regulations to allow for that.

    1. I still think the decision to let the cars between Lewis and Max was the right one

      While leaving the rest? I’d like to know why you think so?

      1. Funnily enough, I think cherry-picking some unlapped cars to unlap and other unlapped cars not to… was very much a wrong, inherently unsporting and ratings-thirsty decision. Enshrining it in the regulations would give the RD unchecked power to manipulate the result whenever they saw fit, which is precisely what all the uproar is about in the first place.

        1. Apologies, was trying to respond to the OP.

      2. No problem. Needless to say, I completely agree with you.

    2. What about the decision to bring the SC in a lap earlier than the regulations stated?

    3. Funnily enough, I think cherry-picking some unlapped cars to unlap and other unlapped cars not to… was very much a wrong, inherently unsporting and ratings-thirsty decision. Enshrining it in the regulations would give the RD unchecked power to manipulate the result whenever they saw fit, which is precisely what all the uproar is about in the first place.

    4. Masi made the wrong decision, one the rules say he shouldn’t have made, and did it straight after Red Bull suggested he did so.

      He’s lucky if he ever works again!

      1. I really hope they don’t give him the WEC Race Director’s job ….

        1. What with up to 3 safety cars to control? God I hope they don’t also.

      2. @sonnycrockett
        If what you’re implying about Masi being biased towards RBR is true then he might land his next job with them.

      3. and did it straight after Red Bull suggested he did so.

        Come on, @sonnycrockett.
        If I tell you to eat breakfast, and then you eat breakfast, you’ve only done it because I told you too….?


        1. Michael (@freelittlebirds)
          17th February 2022, 15:12

          The way it happened, it certainly did appear that he was following Horner’s suggestion and denying Wolff’s.

          1. @freelittlebirds
            That’s because he also followed Wolff’s suggestion earlier in the race when he blatantly told him not to bring the SC but some seems only to remember the situations that goes well with their narrative.

          2. Michael (@freelittlebirds)
            17th February 2022, 15:33

            @tifoso1989 sorry but the Horner-Masi conversations almost seemed like lovebirds. Wolff felt like a third and very unwanted wheel :-) That’s the way things appeared to me.

          3. That’s the way things appeared to me.

            Given all the other things you post here, that doesn’t come as a surprise at all, @freelittlebirds.

      4. @sonnycrockett I think you are well aware that we never get radio comm live, so you are making a big assumption not only with your ‘right after’ suggestion, but you are also being highly insulting towards Masi in suggesting he was biased in RBR’s favour. Biased towards not having the season end under caution perhaps, but biased towards one team? There’s nothing to support that other than out of bitterness.

        1. Masi wasn’t biased per se, and yes we don’t get live radio comms and this was all helped along by the “agreement” teams want a to finish under a green flag

          However, the comms are delayed and this made the timing pretty close to what happened on track that’s it’s not a good look at all for Masi.

          Look, as has been said on many a opinion o this. For RB fans its very hard to argue against all without sounding bitter. It’s far, far from that. If you don’t think Masi did anything wrong then there is bias, not not in the place those fans think.

    5. @pmccarthy_is_a_legend that should not be on the rules but I agree that the decision of going back on the initial call of, prematurely, calling that unlap cars would not be allowed to overtake was correct.
      @sonnycrockett masi made his initial call just after merc rang him saying there was not enough time to restart the race.

  4. Well I think that was the only reasonable outcome. No offence to Masi but whatever happened at that last race was a monumental cock-up and will be argued over for years to come. First race of the season you could overlook, but deciding the title like that is just not great for anyone, even for Max.

    1. So are you saying that the 1st race of the season is less important for the championship than the last? In my opinion the title is decided not in just 1 race but in all of them.

      1. @mcbosch Absolutely not – but I think many people would be able to hand wave it away easier at the start of the season.

      2. Simply put, it would never have happened in the first race of the season, it would have ended under the safety car (as it should have in Abu Dhabi). This is why the whole thing reeks – it should never have happened at any point in any race on the calendar – but because a grand finale was desired and there was an all-consuming desire force a final lap, rules were broken to crowbar it in.

        1. @effwon Sure but there is certainly no small number of fans that would also have a lot more understanding and patience for a race earlier on in the season ending behind a safety car, than for the last race. Just saying it isn’t just Masi and F1/FIA that would have preferred the season not end under caution. They do take license here and there and it is acceptable by most it would seem eg. some leeway given to the drivers in first lap incidents that would go punished if it happened after the first lap. Not speaking of AD specifically, but there is a notion of ‘let them race’ out there that the teams and millions of fans who don’t want to see everything adjudicated and decided in a room after the race, that is going to make for some shades of grey here and there, and I for one certainly do not want F1 to be black and white, cut and dry like tennis with it’s laser eyes on the lines. I don’t want to see drivers out there afraid to race for fear of endless penalties, and at the same time each encounter between drivers is unique.

      3. @mcbosch The race itself? No. Points are points.

        But decisions? Very much. Almost everything else is settled, the consequences of what you are doing is much better known.

    2. Agree, but every race counts. Now looking forward to clarification of the safety car rules. Would be nice to also see the clarification of where the edge of the track is and see it enforced.

      1. well according to the FIA’s own rulebook the edge of the track is defined by the white lines… You would think it would be pretty easy to monitor and enforce that rule…

        1. @mcbosch Yet for decades and decades now we have seen that it is not so easy, so there must be a reason for that. For me the reason is that we can’t be asking these gladiators to go out there and race the pinnacle of cars in the pinnacle of racing only to be penalized for every little touch of a line. This is not tennis. These are complex machines and we are asking these drivers to be daredevils in them, and thrill us or we won’t watch, and that’s going to cause a lot of contentious interaction between drivers and teams. Just saying…if it was so easy, and desirable, they would have done it years and years ago, that’s how long this has been discussed. Personally I don’t want ‘my’ F1 to be so black and white squeaky clean that the drivers are afraid to race.

    3. Agreed. And unfortunately, now that this is official, it confirms that Max’s WDC will always be tainted.

  5. I couldn’t see Michael Masi doing another briefing before a race weekend with Lewis Hamilton sitting in the audience, after what happened in Abu Dhabi. I think it was inevitable Masi had to go, at least if the FIA wanted to show that they’re willing to make some change. Let’s see how this restructuring pans out.

    1. Ruben “I couldn’t see Michael Masi doing another briefing before a race weekend with Lewis Hamilton sitting in the audience, after what happened in Abu Dhabi.” That is a compelling way to put it.

      1. Easy solution: Sack the driver

  6. Man… So we should wait for F1’s VAR everytime there’s an incident?

    All Masi did wrong was not letting the backmarker drivers to passed safety car three laps earlier.

    1. 3 laps earlier – before the track was clear?

      1. It was clear at the end of lap 56.

      2. 3 laps is not correct, but one lap before he could have done it, the track was clear and no one could have said anything aboout it. Now he pays for his mistake and making something so simple , complicated.

        1. @cosan As far as I am aware, there were still marshals on the track a lap earlier, and it’s been agreed that the track is not safe for the cars to unlap until the marshals are clear. This is because there were a few close calls the last time the lapped cars were allowed through with marshals still on track.

          1. @drmouse
            At the end of lap 56 when the cars went through the accident it was clear that the track was clear and the marshals were already behind the guardrails off the track. That’s the moment when the call of lapped cars should unlap themselves should have been issued and a whole lap with start finish line and two long straights is more than enough for all the cars to pass by and the race to resume with Verstappen behind Hamilton.

          2. I just rewatched the video, they could have let the lapped cars through during lap 56

          3. I haven’t rewatched, because I don’t want to see that travesty again, so have been going by what others have said.

            If the track was clear, he should have done so, but it certainly wouldn’t be the first time there was a slight delay in getting things going again. Also, that still doesn’t excuse the rest.

          4. Actually….

            At the end of lap 56 when the cars went through the accident it was clear that the track was clear and the marshals were already behind the guardrails off the track.

            This means that you are suggesting they start unlapping at the end of lap 56. This would have meant the last car unlaps during lap 57. Given the regulations state the SC shouldn’t come in until the end of the following lap, that would mean finishing under the SC still. For a green flag finish following the written procedures with lapped runners allowed through, he would need to have had all lapped cars through before the end of lap 56.

            This may well have been the reason for his delay. Masi knew that, following the written procedures, allowing the lapped runners through would have meant ending under the SC. Not letting them through would allow a green-flag finish, something all the competitors had said they wanted.

            The problem is that, towards the middle of lap 57 IIRC, he suddenly changed his mind, threw procedure out of the window and invented something new.

    2. All Masi did wrong was not letting the backmarker drivers to passed safety car three laps earlier.

      While marshals were still on the track? I’m pretty sure that there was outrage when they did that a couple of years ago and there were a few near misses, and everyone agreed that this shouldn’t be allowed until all the marshals were clear.

    3. Agreed, I don’t think the VAR aspect is a good thing.

      Masi just needed some guidance on how to apply rules. I don’t think he deserved the sack. And now the FIA have cast doubt on the legitimacy of their own championship.

      1. Masi changed his mind after the RBR race director instructed him what to do? Agree he was like A rabbit in the headlights

      2. Which IMO is as it should be and the first step toward correcting the problems. IMO the farce of the Spa non-race was just as bad if not worse and was a part of the reason 2021 will always have an ‘*’ for me. Now on to the discussion of track limits…. ;)

    4. @ruliemaulana He also brought the SC in one lap too early, in direct contradiction to the regulations.

  7. So the conclusion is that the role of race director was a bit too much for one person, especially with the team bosses pressuring/persuading him to make (or not make) certain decisions in an already stressful situation. And they are going to fix that. I feel Masi was (as expected) scapegoated here. Mercedes and Hamilton might feel a bit of redemption (or revenge) for him to be removed, but otherwise it’s a bit of a hollow move from the FIA and some might even feel they’re listening too much to Mercedes/Hamilton.

  8. Remarkably for the FIA these sound like sensible changes, though of course the proof will be in the implementation. Having Freitas on board is a huge win in my book.

    1. IT’s also a huge loss for the WEC …

  9. Some positives here, and it makes me slightly more hopeful that they may be planning to clear up the RD’s “God Powers” in a way which I can accept, but I’ll need to see confirmation and much more detail.

    I do think they still need to release the actual report in full, though.

    1. @drmouse So far nothing mentioned fixes the root problem.

      1. @fluxsource agreed. There is enough here to keep me watching for what happens, waiting to see whether they do fix the root problems, but not enough to convince me that they will. It’s still a waiting game, for me, see what happens and decide from there.

  10. As close to an admission of guilt as you’ll ever get from the FIA.

    1. Exactly, 100% what I thought when I saw the news.
      Masi put he whole season at the highest level of motor racing into disrepute to prioritize spectacle. The damage he helped to create is way bigger than whatever trending topic F1 was or the next Drive to Survive audience.
      Masi should have been sacked unceremoniously before Abu Dhabi, but the shambolic end of the season was way worse that anyone could have expected.

  11. A good decision to replace Masi but in a sense he paid the price for the bad/appalling behaviour of Red Bull and Mercedes, pressurizing and bullying him from both sides until he effectively lost the plot at the most critical point of the entire season. Personally I think some intervention should have been made after the weird decision at Brazil to leave MV unpenalized, which is where it started getting really out of hand. (And if anyone thinks this is partisan, I’d suggest that the break point is when a critical mass of drivers from other teams start complaining that they have no idea what the racing rules are anymore.) Over the next few races, it was clear Masi was under increasing pressure and neither Red Bull or Mercedes relented in their unsavoury cajoling and whining on the radio, far from it. Really, if that’s what they’re like, OK, but I don’t want to hear it. Filtering the communication seems by far the best idea in this ‘package’ of measures, along with better tech and HR support for the race director(s).

    1. +1 I had temporarily forgotten about Brazil. That and Spa were just as problematic for me as Abu Dhabi in terms of race legitimacy.

    2. The problem is that most of those decisions were from the stewards, not from Masi himself. IIRC Max’s manoeuvre in Brazil, for instance, was refered to the stewards, but they decided no investigation was necessary.

      Almost all of the controversial and confusing decisions were made by the stewards. Spa and Abu Dhabi were both Masi’s calls, and they were 2 of the most shocking, but none of this is addressing the massive increase in inconsistency of stewards decisions this year (and that’s in a sport where, for years, the most consistent thing has been the stewards’ inconsistency…)

      1. The problem is they sacked masi but did not solved the real problem.
        The stewarding is and always will be very inconsistent in this system.
        Did Max benefitted by the masi decision , lewis had a lot more inconsistent stewarding calls that seem to go unnoticed by the ham fans. It started with 29 times crossing the tracklimit with aprox 0.3s gained each time, until Verstappen did the same..
        So for now it still is a face if only Masi is seen as scapegoat.

      2. @drmouse I’m not so sure. If you listen to Masi’s comments, it sounds like a collective ‘we’ about not investigating the incident, not just the stewards. That gives me the impression that there is some kind of discussion between the race director and stewards on whether they should investigate – basically a joint decision, which Masi may therefore influence heavily (noting, in passing, that he repeated the Red Bull line about ‘let them race’). If the stewards decide to investigate, then it’s entirely up to them. Does that sound about right? This is Masi:

        “You judge the incident on its merits and you have a look at all of it. And let’s not forget, we have the overall ‘let them race’ principles, and looking at it all, with all of the angles that we had available, it was that philosophy was adopted.”

        1. @david-br Just to be clear though ‘let them race’ is hardly new nor hardly just a Red Bull thing. This has been discussed many many times over the years, usually when it has started to feel like the stewards were being too policey and teams and fans were expressing frustration at everything (or too much) being decided in the stewards’ room. Let’s not pretend ‘let them race’ is a phrase coined by Horner and thus repeated by Masi. Masi said it because all the teams talk about it and have for years. Further to that of course it usually takes a contentious rivalry throughout a season for that to become more frequent, significant and/or noticeable, ‘that’ being the concept to just let them race. Eg at Mercedes in 2016 there were incidents between LH and NR that the stewards decided to let TW deal with and were thus deemed racing incidents, rather than the stewards deciding how to deal with two combatant teammates.

          1. @robbie No it’s a good point I accept in principle, we should favour ‘let them race.’ However, we know that teams will push literally any envelope available to them and in this case it simply wasn’t (in my view and that of many or most people) acceptable that MV forced LH off track by going well wide himself. My point was that Masi did, no doubt unintentionally, repeat what he’d just heard from Red Bull, almost unthinkingly given the context (in my view). As for LH and NR, it’s not the same, sorry. Drivers on the same team are treated differently as the teams don’t intervene to pressurize the race director for referral to the stewards. So it’s easier to allow a ‘let them race’ response.